Sunday, January 15, 2017

Beavis, Butthead and The Russian Dossier




January 10 CNN published an article about a 2-page intelligence report based on 35 pages of memos allegedly assembled by a former British intelligence agent.  This report claimed that Russian intelligence had compromising material on Donald Trump of a sexual nature and that Trump supporters were in constant contact with the Russian government.  The implication is that Trump is a tool of the Russians.   The CNN article stressed the sensitivity of the synopsis stating it was only “shared at the most senior levels of the government.”  They also stressed that the source of the information was credible.  The article is filled with references to CNN’s access: “multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN,” “US intelligence officials consider credible,” “multiple sources tell CNN,” and “some officials said.”  CNN obviously has access.  It is also most certainly illegal.  These leaks revealed the close relationship the media and intelligence elites have in their efforts to destroy Trump.

This was all a very effective anti-Trump effort, but then something went terribly wrong.  Shortly after the CNN report was published, BuzzFeed published the 35 pages of memos the article was based on.  The remarkable thing about these memos is that they are so poorly done that it has often been suggested that they are some kind of joke.  Clarice Feldman stated, “the dossier is so ridiculous, if anyone in the Intelligence Community fell for it, he’s too stupid to allow in place.”  John Bolton claimed, “I haven’t found anybody, including friends who are experienced in both diplomacy and military and intelligence affairs, who haven’t just laughed at most of it.”  Bob Woodward stated, “That is a garbage document.”  Vice President Biden told reporters that he and President Obama did not ask the intelligence community to corroborate the claims because they didn’t take them seriously.  Even Piers Morgan commented, “The moment I heard about it, my gut reaction was that it was utter nonsense.”  A writer for Global Research concluded, “Any media or intelligence agency that claims it could or did not judge the content of 35 papers is obfuscating in an attempt to give them additional weight. The easily verifiable content is so obviously false that the few not immediately verifiable claims in it can not be taken serious.”

This dossier was reportedly assembled by Christopher Steele, a former MI-6 agent.  Although CNN described Steele as “credible,” Feldman described him as a “dumpster diver for Democrats.”  Judging from the quality of the dossier this is actually a compliment.  It also suggests that Steele may not have been the author.  The adolescent nature of the charges and the obvious format errors make it appear to be a hoax that was meant to be exposed.  It appears more like the work of "Cracka with Attitude," the 16-year old who broke into James Clapper’s personal email account rerouting the calls intended for Clapper to the Free Palestine Movement. 

The obvious format errors begin on the first page.  The page is labeled  CONFIDENTIAL/SENSITIVE SOURCE.”  Sensitive sources are never confidential.  They are never SECRET or even simply TOP SECRET.  They would have an additional classification.  Although this is not a government document, someone with experience in intel would never classify a sensitive source as confidential.  Donald Trump’s attorney, Michael Cohen naturally told reporters that the allegations in the report were absolutely false.  He said, “It’s so ridiculous on so many levels.   Clearly, the person who created this did so from their imagination or did so hoping that the liberal media would run with this fake story for whatever rationale they might have.”  On page 18 of the memos, Cohen is reported to be in Prague meeting with Russian officials.  Cohen has never been in Prague.  Gerard Vanderleun provides an extremely entertaining debunking of the “peegate” allegation. 

Many aspects of this incident are comical, however, they could have deadly consequences.  Aside from the revelation that our intelligence agencies are run by utter incompetence, the lives of our military are at stake.  The intel leadership is well aware of the fact that these memos are bogus.  Their incompetence lies in their belief that they could pass them off as legitimate. 

To add to the confusion there are other sources that would like to contribute to this kerfuffle.  Multiple reliable sources who wish to remain anonymous have revealed the identities of the two youths who are responsible for the “golden shower” allegation.  They go by the nicknames of Beavis and Butthead.  Four intelligence chiefs have strenuously denied that these two are the source of the information.  They have also denied that they have received job offers from Ringling Brothers. 


Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan



Reagan Would Not Think Kindly of Trump’s Assault on the Intelligence Community
by Laurence Jurdem

Laurence Jurdem is an independent scholar who received his Ph.D. in U.S. History from Fordham University. For more information, please visit the author's website laurencejurdem.com

A report released Friday by U.S. intelligence officials, stated that Russian President Vladimir Putin “ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election.” The conclusions of the study are in sharp conflict with President-Elect Donald Trump’s assertion that there was no proof Moscow had hacked the Democrats or interfered with the election. Mr. Trump’s harsh critique of the American intelligence system could lead to long-term problems between the White House and America’s spy agencies. Despite the president-elect’s claim that he is now receiving intelligence updates, he has in the past ridiculed the idea of daily intelligence briefings from national security officials, because, as he said last month: "I don't have to be told the same thing and the same words every single day for the next eight years.” By constantly belittling and criticizing American intelligence organizations, the incoming president has displayed an attitude that is directly in conflict with the chief executive with whom Mr. Trump is frequently compared by conservatives – Ronald Reagan.
See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/164862#sthash.9WIfBzEW.dpuf





Laurence,
I am retired from the DIA so I speak with a certain amount of insight.  I would like to reassure you that problems between the White House and America’s spy agencies are unlikely.  Donald Trump is not “constantly belittling and criticizing American intelligence organizations.”  You state, “Mr. Trump seems to have had difficulty understanding . . . it was important he be kept up to date on the latest national security information.”  You state Trump criticizes the intelligence community, “simply because he did not agree with their findings regarding the question of Russian cyberespionage.”

President-elect Trump has criticized the Obama appointed leaders of the intelligence agencies.  He does not disagree with them “simply” because of their stance on Russian cyberespionage.  He is critical of them because he has been a target of their unsubstantiated claims that he was the beneficiary of that espionage.  A successful businessman knows the value of intelligence.  If he was not satisfied with the quality of the information there was a reason.


Should we have confidence in the Obama appointed leadership of the intelligence agencies?  50 analysts working for the U.S. Central Command have lodged a formal complaint about their reports on ISIS being “inappropriately altered” by senior officials.  Career analysts do not do this.  They do not endanger their careers over minor matters.  The national director of intelligence, James Clapper, lied under oath during a congressional hearing.  I can promise you that intelligence community shredders will be working non-stop until January 20.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Donald Trump and Climate Change

Response to an op-ed in the New York Times by Nicholas Kristof: As Donald Trump Denies Climate Change, These Kids Die of It

Mass starvation is not the proper subject for satire.  Yet, Kristof’s article pushes the limits.  The article is an attack on the United States and Donald Trump in particular.  “American technology helped create the problem.” The problem being the drought in Madagascar.  Kristof’s recurring accusation is the U.S. is responsible: “We Americans may be inadvertently killing her infant son,” and “The United States single-handedly accounts for more than one-quarter of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions over the last 150 years.”
    
Kristof recognizes that much of the food aid comes from American, yet his “pride is mixed with guilt.”  He informs us, “I flew halfway around the world and then drove for two days to get to these villages, pumping out carbon the whole way.”  He does not really feel guilty.  Otherwise he would sell his expensive Canon camera, miss a few meals, and don sackcloth and ashes.  He will not do this because he is entitled.  Like the leaders of Madagascar he does without little because he is part of the caring elite.

Kristof lets us know that “In America, climate change costs families beach homes.”  In Madagascar it costs children their lives.  Climate change is “disproportionately caused by carbon emissions from America.”  The greatest contributor of carbon emissions is mainland China.  Kristof makes no mention of this.  He also makes no mention of the July 3, 2008 statement Obama made about “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

“Africa’s drought and food crisis have gone largely unnoticed.”  One of the reasons the media is not interested in covering the food crisis is because they are partially responsible.  The press played a large part in the destruction of Rhodesia, the breadbasket of southern Africa.  Zimbabwe has been suffering from droughts since 1979.  Like expectancy has declined from the 60s to the mid 30s.   


Kristof suggests that a villager has more knowledge than Trump, “The most basic starting point is for the American president-elect to acknowledge what even illiterate Madagascar villagers understand: Climate change is real.”  This reporter should be nominated for the New York Times’ prestigious Walter Duranty Award.

Sunday, January 8, 2017

The "Children" of Calais


People commit fraud.  This is not surprising or unusual.  In order for fraud to be successful it must be plausible.  Totally implausible efforts to deceive are something beyond fraud.  This is the case with the child refugee fraud being perpetrated in Europe.  There is something pathological about it.  In an effort to empty the refugee camp in Calais (the jungle) the British are accepting “child refugees.”  The idea that many of these refugees are children requires a certain amount of mental imbalance.

A 16-year-old from Ethiopia cries while he awaits registration at a processing in the makeshift refugee camp near Calais.


Rosie a “foster mother” in Britain was “horrified” to learn that her 12-year-old Afghan refugee orphan, Jamal, was a 21-year-old jahidi.  Rosie at first became suspicious of his facial hair.  Yet she allowed him to share a room with three children aged between 12 and 14.  Jamal was subsequently arrested for assault.  It was later revealed that he had Taliban and child abuse material on his phone.  A dental check found his age to actually be around 21. Rosie complained, “It’s ridiculous how everybody else could see it but not the social workers.”  A bus driver threw Jamal off a bus because he looked too old for a child ticket. Perhaps the driver should be hired by the immigration service.  Jamal’s parting words to Rosie were, “'I’ll kill you and I know where your children are.” 

The Government claims these refugees are aged 14 to 17.  They are part of a fast-track system to move youngsters from the French migrant camp.  Officials insist the migrants have undergone rigorous interviews and document checks to establish they are aged under 18.  After seeing photos of these “children,” Conservative MP David Davies wrote, “These don't look like 'children' to me. I hope British hospitality is not being abused.”  The article states, “A Home Office spokesman admitted that routine medical tests, such as checking dental records, have not been carried out because it could be 'intrusive'.”  MP Davies remains hopeful.

Another couple with “years of experience fostering refugees” were shocked to find their children were adults.  Sarah and Giles, using false names for fear of reprisals, reported that migrant children who claim to be 15 are actually in their mid-twenties.  They claim one “child” reportedly told them,  “You English are so stupid – I’m in my twenties.”  They were told to take in a 15-year-old boy from Albania.  An elderly doctor told the foster couple: “If that lad is 14, I am 23.”  They claimed, “He lived with us for two years and went to school as a 15 and 16-year-old.”  Knowing that this was a fraudulent scheme, Sarah and Giles continued to play their part in it.

Sarah claimed they were usually notified at night by a social worker who informed them that the police had stopped a truck of migrants and one had claimed to be under 18. The social worker would ask them it they could take him in.  This couple have fostered dozens of asylum seeker children.  They say they were shocked when many turned out to be adults.  They claimed that social services had “no interest” in this trend.  According to this article some of these “children” from migrant camps in Calais appear to be up to 38 years old.  The article continues, “New Home Office figures show more than two-thirds of refugees who had their ages assessed were found to be adults despite claiming to be children.”  It claims of the 933 refugees who claimed to be children, 636 (68 per cent) were deemed to be over 18.   

In contrast to Britain, Denmark relies on medical methods of evaluating refugee ages.  By X-raying asylum-seekers' teeth and knuckles, Danish doctors have concluded that 74 percent of young men in the "suspicious" group (or around 600 individuals) were actually adults. This is in stark contrast to theirs Scandinavian neighbor, Sweden.

Sweden, the rape capital of the West, has a very “progressive” method of determining age.  According to Ingrid Carlqvist writing for the Gatestone Institute, “administrators at the Immigration Service had all been ordered to ‘accept the claim that an applicant is a child, if he does not look as if he is over 40.’”  People who disagree with this method of determining age are in danger of being labeled 'heartless' or 'xenophobic.'

Ireland, as every European nation, is dealing with the problem of adult refugees claiming to be children.  The article describing this situation reports, “speculation in some media outlets that some of the young men may be over 18.”  Fred McBride, the head of Ireland’s child and family agency and an apparent expert on aging, stated, “Some of them are not children, they’re actually adults pretending to be children.”  McBride explained, “some will flee immediately on landing at the port or airport.”   In other words the are allowed to flee and blend into the alien community.


















Friday, January 6, 2017

The Establishment Attack on Donald Trump



The continuing campaign to discredit President-elect Trump is increasing in intensity.   It is based on allegations that the Russians interfered in the U.S. election.  It is suggested that Hillary Clinton would have won the election if the Russians had not interfered.  The establishment media echoes accounts by the administration’s anonymous sources frequently neglecting to include the word “alleged.”  In spite of their damaged credibility they have demonstrated that they can still be influential.  In addition to anonymous sources the media is relying on academics and retired intelligence personnel.

The New York Times has reported, “The assessment by American intelligence agencies that the Russian government stole and leaked Clinton campaign emails has been accepted across the political spectrum, with the notable exception of Mr. Trump.”  Apparently the Times searched for people who supported Trump but they were unable to locate them.  Trump’s critics are everywhere.

Critics of the President-elect have charged him with everything but being a KGB agent.  Former acting CIA director Michael Morell claims Putin has “cleverly recruited Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”  Michael V. Hayden, former director of the NSA and CIA, says he prefers the term: polezni durak. “That’s the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.”  Senator Harry Reid wrote to FBI Director James Comey, “It has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government — a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity.”  The New York Post quotes a CIA official, “It’s pretty horrifying to me that he’s siding with Assange over the intelligence agencies.”

Academics have weighed in.  Joshua Rovner of Southern Methodist University declared, “By ignoring intelligence, Trump risks policy tunnel vision.” Rovner is an “expert” and the John Goodwin Tower Distinguished Chair of International Politics and National Security so he must know what he is talking about.  CNN contributor and former CIA official, Bob Baer another “expert” claimed, “Assange going on about a 14 year-old being able to hack Podesta is nonsense.”  Of course Assange was exaggerating which made his claim “nonsense.”  He should have said 15 year-old.   John McAfee has pointed out that the Chinese stole every record that the FBI had; and in February, “a 15 year old boy hacked the FBI and published 30 thousand records including undercover agents of every agent within the FBI organization.”  The teenage hacking group, "Cracka with Attitude," has also hacked into the email accounts of CIA director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. 

On October 07, 2016 the Director of National Intelligence issued a Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security.  In it they claimed the hacked e-mails, “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.”  They added, “we are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government.”  This was enough for Rep. Elijah Cummings to claim, "experts agree that there is overwhelming evidence that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election.”   California Rep. Eric Swalwell claimed Trump’s denials are ridiculous.  "He (Trump) is denying that the sun sets in the West." 
Senator McCain called Russia's hacking "an unprecedented attack on our democracy,” and suggested it would be an act of war had Moscow's action’s affected the results of the election.

People who disagree with the establishment narrative are unpatriotic.  When Tucker Carlson asked Rep. Adam Schiff for evidence to support his allegation that Putin ordered the hacking of Podesta’s emails, Schiff’s response was that Carlson was carrying water for Vladimir Putin and was an “apologist for the Kremlin.”  Senator Claire McCaskill declared, “The notion that the soon elected leader of this country would put Julian Assange on a pedestal compared to the men and women of the intelligence community. . . I think it should bring about a hue and cry.”  Senator Blumenthal added, “I want to explore a little bit why these very demeaning and dismissive comments about our intelligent community are so dangerous.”

Trump is having trouble with the leadership of the intelligence community.  He may have wide support among the rank and file.  The leadership of the intelligence community has been politicized.  Information is frequently distorted.  50 intel analysts have made a formal complaint about their reports on ISIS be altered.  Rep. Peter King claimed CIA Director John Brennan was orchestrating a “hit job.”
He stated, “We have John Brennan—supposedly John Brennan—leaking to The Washington Post, to a biased newspaper like The New York Times, findings and conclusions that he’s not telling the intelligence committee…” The Director of National Intelligence James Clapper may have committed perjury and definitely misled Congress in his testimony in 2013 on NSA data collection.

All modern governments collect information on other governments, allied and enemy.  Ordinarily they do not divulge what they know because they do not want to jeopardize their sources.  It is no secret that the United States has used information it has gained to influence events in other countries.  There is no question that Russia “hacked” various U.S. databases.  The question is: did they use this information to influence the U.S. election.  U.S. intelligence cannot answer that question convincingly.  Only the Russians know for sure.  U.S. intelligence contends that the Russians did not attempt to attack U.S. the voter registration database.  However, attacks may have taken place.   Georgia’s Secretary of State Brian Kemp claimed local authorities tracked down the origin of a hacker attack on his voter registration database after the election.  “The attack was traced to an IP address of the Department of Homeland Security.”   WSB-TV in Atlanta reported, “two more states, West Virginia and Kentucky, confirmed that the same IP address accessed their election system.”
 

The establishment narrative is that Trump is a tool of Putin.  How can this tool of the Russians be sworn in while tensions with Russia are increasing at such a rapid rate?  The Russians are being used as a tool to attack Trump.  His critics will oppose him on every issue.  Some of his harshest critics are within his own party.  Senators McCain and Graham would have been more comfortable working with a President Hillary Clinton than with Donald Trump.

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

There Are No Secrets

The following article was rejected by American Thinker for the following reasons: 

There are some serious problems with this piece. Chief among them is the citation from Maxine Waters as an authority on IT. In fact, the database she's talking about is the new DNC voter database, which has nothing to do with security or surveillance.

This piece could work as a blog item if you cut that out and cut the rest to about 500 words or so. If you can do that, I'll take another look.

I disagree with American Thinker about the importance of the remarks made by Maxine Waters.  I mistakenly attributed the database she referred to as a U.S. government creation when it was actually a creation of the Democratic Party.  This “new DNC voter database” is based on the "Organizing for America" database.  It was restructured as a 501(c)4 and renamed "Organizing for Action" in 2012.  You do not have to be paranoid to believe that it will include more than Democratic voters and that it will be abused.


On 30 December 2016 Larry King interviewed John McAfee, a pioneer in computer security and founder of the McAfee anti-virus company.  McAfee, who does not appear to be a fan of Donald Trump, reaffirmed Trump’s assertion that the Russians were not responsible for hacking Clinton’s emails and influencing the U.S. election.  It was a very revealing and disturbing interview.  He touched on the vulnerability of the U.S. government databases and the extent of government intrusion into the private affairs of Americans.  He claims the U.S. government has the capability of monitoring all electronic transmissions.

McAfee’s assertion that the Russians were not responsible for the hacking relies on his experience and common sense:

When the FBI or any other agency says the Russians did it or the Chinese did something or the Iranians did something, that’s a fallacy.  Any hacker capable of breaking into something is extraordinarily capable of hiding their tracks.  If I were the Chinese and I wanted to make it look like the Russians did it, I would use Russian language within the code.  I would use Russian techniques of breaking into organizations.  So there is simply no way to assign a source for any attack.  This is a fallacy.  This is what the FBI and other agencies want us to believe so that they can manipulate our opinions.  I can promise you, if it looks like the Russians did it, it was not the Russians.  

McAfee pointed out that the Chinese stole every record that the FBI had; and in February, “a 15 year old boy hacked the FBI and published 30 thousand records including undercover agents of every agent within the FBI organization.”  The teenage hacking group, "Cracka with Attitude," has hacked into the email accounts of CIA director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. 

This reveals just how vulnerable government databases are.  McAfee claims, “If the U.S. government believes that the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians do not already have all of our secrets because of their hacking technologies then our government is deluding itself.”  This would also apply to the U.S. government’s ability to access others’ databases.  McAfee suggests that the U.S. Government is overly concerned with information on U.S. citizens.  The prevalence of data collection of private information has been revealed by Representative Maxine Waters.  Waters remarked:

The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life.  That’s going to be very, very powerful.  That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”

Waters was referring to a database described as "Organizing for America."  This database was restructured as a 501(c)4  in 2012 and renamed "Organizing for Action."  Waters does not say this database contains information on only Democratic voters.  She says it “will have information about everything on every individual.”  A Washington Post article claims, “If you voted this election season, President Obama almost certainly has a file on you.”  The article continues to include the type of information the database will contain.  The description makes it appears very innocent.  However, you do not have to be paranoid to foresee abuse.  One only has to recall Hillary Clinton’s 1996 Filegate scandal.

The campaign to attribute the hacking to the Russians has been remarkably effective. This is illustrated by the large number of people who have accepted the government tale.  The media have been joined by Obama sycophants like Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Paul Ryan.  When reporting on this situation they do not use the word “alleged.”  It is asserted that the Russians were responsible without qualification.  Sen. John McCain has called the alleged Russian cyberattacks an “act of war.” He almost appears belligerent enough to call for a nuclear response.  These threats should concern all Americans.  We know about the expulsion of 35 diplomats and the economic sanctions.  The more serious concerns are the details of the announced “covert” cyber attack on Russia.  Larry King asked McAfee, “What can the United States do?”  McAfee responded, “We could destroy every nation on the planet.”  This may be something of an exaggeration.  However, a cyber attack can be very damaging and Vladimir Putin my not be able to laugh off a more serious attack. 

McAfee believes that this attempt to blame the Russians, “is what the FBI and other agencies want us to believe so that they can manipulate our opinions.”  This reminds one of H.L. Mencken statement, “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”  Politicians like John McCain are aware of the cyber security situation.  They are intentionally trying to manipulate the public.